John Kerry, Those “Illegal” Settlements, That “Two-State Solution” (Part I)

There’s a lot that has already been said about John Kerry’s appalling speech defending the Obama Administration’s abstention on the anti-Israel Resolution 2334 in the U.N. Security Council. Prime Minister Netanyahu noted tartly that Kerry gave insufficient attention to the long record of “Palestinian” terrorism, that he “obsessively dealt with the settlements” and ignored “the root of the conflict– which is Palestinian opposition to a Jewish state in any boundaries.” (Both Theresa May, Prime Minister of Great Britain, and Julie Bishop, Foreign Affairs Minister of Australia, have deplored Kerry’s attack on Israel, his obsession with the settlements and failure to grasp the full horror of “Palestinian” terrorism).

Others have pointed out that by allowing the passage of such an extreme resolution, one that describes East Jerusalem, which includes the Old City, the Western Wall, the Temple Mount, and the oldest Jewish cemetery in the world, on the Mount of Olives, as “occupied Palestinian territory,” the Obama Administration, far from promoting that “just and lasting peace” that Kerry refers to almost as often as he does to the “two-state solution” (a “solution” only because it keeps being described as such, to be taken on faith), has now made it difficult for the Arab states, much less the “Palestinian” Arabs, to accept anything less than the return of all of East Jerusalem. And that is a demand that no Israeli administration could ever accept.

Israel has had to fight three major wars – in 1948, 1967, and 1973 – and two minor ones (the first, the Sinai Campaign of 1956, put an end to thousands of cross-border attacks by Egyptian fedayeen; the second, the Gaza War of 2008-2009, ended rocket attacks by Hamas), as well as having to endure an endless series of “Palestinian” terrorist attacks, on schoolchildren and schoolhouses, supermarkets and open air markets, restaurants, cars, busses, bus stops, bus stations, airports, airplanes, hospital personnel and hospitals, houses and apartment buildings. No wonder that Israelis agree with Prime Minister Netanyahu that they have more than earned the right to decide for themselves the minimum conditions of their own security. And just possibly John Kerry might take the time from his busy schedule of self-righteous scoldings to study the sheer number and variety of terrorist attacks that Israelis have endured, by reading the record here.

Israel has been remarkably generous in its demonstrated willingness to “take risks for peace,” though Obama and Kerry hardly seem to have noticed. Israel decided, for example, that it could risk giving back the entire Sinai, in exchange for a peace treaty with Egypt in 1979. So far, taking that risk seems to have paid off, at least as long as Al-Sisi stays in power and the Muslim Brotherhood is held in check. Israel gave up all of Gaza, too, hoping that the Gazan Arabs (“Palestinians”), now masters of their own fate, would choose coexistence and possible prosperity, beginning with the greenhouses the Israelis delivered to them intact. Instead, the Arabs smashed up the greenhouses, Hamas took over in Gaza, and the rockets on which Hamas spent so much of the aid it received began to be fired into the towns and cities of Israel. That was a risk that did not work out, and the Gaza War was required to bring Hamas to its temporary senses.

Israelis also ceded control of parts of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority, even without receiving the hoped-for quid pro quo, that is, recognition of the right of the Jewish state to exist. Far from stubbornly holding onto territory, as Kerry appeared to imply, Israel has given up fully 95% of the territory it won in the Six-Day War. But that should not be taken to mean that Israel is therefore obligated to give up the 5% that it has kept if, in its judgment, in order to have “secure and defensible borders,” it needs to hold onto what now remains under its control.

Kerry maintains that it is “extremist” and “religious” settlers who are insisting on keeping land that should go to the “Palestinians” in a “two-state solution.” No doubt the settlers do include a large number of the religiously-motivated. But so what? Isn’t the Arab claim to “all of Palestine” based on Islamic doctrine, and thus “religiously motivated” as well? The religious settlers in the West Bank fulfill a dual function. One is to engage in the “close Jewish settlement on the land,” as specifically encouraged by Article 6 of the Mandate for Palestine. And Article 6 in turn rests on the legal, historic, and moral claims of the Jews to their historic Jewish homeland, from the Jordan River to the sea, that the League of Nations’ Mandates Commission recognized. But the settlements of the “religious” settlers are also defensive military outposts; their civilian inhabitants act as an early-warning system, are armed and prepared to fight in order to slow down any Arab invading force, giving the largely civilian army in Israel time to assemble, and are thus critical to helping ensure that Israel has “secure and defensible borders.”

What Kerry apparently finds outrageous is that some of Israel’s settlements are indeed located so as to prevent large contiguous blocs of land populated by Arabs. But that’s just the point: Israel has a legal right, under the Mandate, to plant settlements everywhere in Mandatory Palestine, including what became known as the “West Bank”; that right was not extinguished by the dead letter of the Partition Plan, and has only been reinforced by another right, derived from U.N. Resolution 242, for Israel to have “secure and recognized” borders which, in a formulation repeatedly used by both the American and Israeli governments, has been taken to mean “secure and defensible borders.” President Bush, for example, in 2004 reiterated his government’s “strong commitment to Israel’s security including secure and defensible borders.” Whatever else the settlements do, some have also been deliberately situated so as to promote those “secure and defensible borders” which, in the West Bank, necessarily means control of the Jordan Valley and of the Judean and Samarian hills.

John Kerry finds it unsporting of the Israelis to want to make it possible to defend themselves by acting in accordance with both the provisions of the Mandate and Resolution 242. Why is Israel so stubbornly unwilling, when it already lives in conditions of peril greater than those endured by any other country in history, to imperil itself still further?

What deserves more attention is the way that John Kerry has ignored, or misunderstood, or deliberately misstated, milestones in the history of the Jewish state and the unending Arab Muslim war against it. He mentions Theodor Herzl’s First Zionist Congress (1897), offers a few ready tears about European antisemitism, but then skips over both the Balfour Declaration (1917), and the League of Nations’ Mandate for Palestine (1922). Surely it is important to understand what the League of Nations thought it was doing when it set up the Mandate for Palestine, the foundational document of the Jewish State. Just as the mandates for Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria were intended to, and did, lead to the establishment of several independent Arab states, carved out of what had been part of the Ottoman Empire, the Mandate for Palestine had, as its sole purpose, the establishment of a Jewish homeland that would then become the Jewish state. As noted above (and it cannot be repeated often enough), Great Britain’s responsibility as Mandatory was to encourage “close Jewish settlement on the land.” When the United Nations was established, it “inherited” the Mandate from the now-defunct League of Nations and by Chapter 12, Article 80, of the U.N. Charter, known as the “Palestine article,” the U.N. affirmed Jewish rights, under the Mandate, to continue “close Jewish settlement” on the land, from the Jordan to the Mediterranean.

Kerry skips over the Mandate, and with reason. For if the American public were to know what the Mandate for Palestine was all about, and became aware that the U.N. had inherited that Mandate and its express terms, many in that public would begin to understand that the phrase “occupied Palestinian territory” misstates reality, with a political rather than a legal claim. From 1922 on, the Jews were legally entitled to buy land, and to settle everywhere from the Jordan to the sea. And they did so, often paying exorbitant prices to absentee Arab landlords in Beirut and Amman. Until the 1948 war broke out, not a dunam of Arab-owned land was expropriated; every bit of private land the Jews acquired in Mandatory Palestine was paid for. “State and waste lands,” formerly the property of the Ottoman state, were inherited by the Mandatory authority, and then by the Jewish state, and also available for settlement.

Leaving both the Mandate for Palestine and Article 80 of the U.N. Charter out of his tendentious narrative, Kerry leaps from Herzl in 1897 to the U.N. Partition Plan of November 29, 1947, that is, General Assembly Resolution 181, by which the territory that had formerly been assigned to the Jewish state was now to be split between a Jewish and an Arab state, with Jerusalem placed under an international administration as a corpus separatum. Kerry mentions this Plan as having “paved the way to making the state of Israel a reality.” Actually what made Israel a “reality” was not any U.N. Resolution, but only the ability of the Jews of the newly-declared state to repel the attacks from three sides, by the invading armies of five Arab states.

It is true that the Jewish Agency had signaled acceptance of the Partition Plan; it felt it had no choice – hundreds of thousands of Jews had been arriving in Palestine from D.P. camps in Europe, the survivors of Hitlerism, and the Jews in Palestine had relatively few weapons to fight with, and were also subject to an arms embargo while there was no such embargo on the Arabs. Given this perilous situation, it made sense for the Zionists to accept the Partition Plan, despite its unfairness to them. But then the Arabs did two things. First, they unanimously voted against the Plan in November 1947, refusing to accept any Jewish state, no matter what its size. Second,on May 15, 1948, the day after Israel declared its independence, the Arabs invaded, sure that they would be able to snuff out the young life of the nascent Jewish state. The Secretary-General of the Arab League, the Egyptian Azzam Pasha, had declared the previous October that were the Arabs forced to go to war against the Jews (that is, if the Jews insisted on declaring a state), it would be “a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacre and the Crusades.” The Arab rejection, and then attack on Israel, released the Jews from any previous undertaking to accept the Partition Plan.

Kerry mentions none of this history. He speaks as if the Arabs had not turned the Partition Plan down, nor invaded Israel. In his telling, the Partition Plan is still valid, providing for a “Jewish” and a “Palestinian” state. The “Palestinians,” of course, as a people had not yet been invented in 1947; they were still just “Arabs” or “Palestinian Arabs,” and would remain so until after the Six-Day War. From 1949 until the Six-Day War, Jordan held onto the “West Bank” and made not the slightest effort to create a “Palestinian state,” with or without Egyptian-controlled Gaza. Why not? What was preventing the Arabs from setting up a “Palestinian state” during that whole period? Kerry doesn’t answer this important question, much less raise it. Nor does he ask himself why, when there were no “settlements” in the “West Bank” between 1949 and 1967, Arab hostility to Israel was even stronger than it is today.

At the conclusion of the 1948-49 war, Israel offered to make the armistice lines of 1949 into permanent borders. It was willing, in other words, to accept what Abba Eban called the “lines of Auschwitz,” to live with a nine-mile-wide waist at Qalqilya, and to give up its rights under the Mandate to the “West Bank.” But in each of the agreements with Israel’s neighbors, the Arab side insisted that the 1949 armistice lines did not confer recognition of rights to any land, on either side. Those armistice lines were repeatedly violated by the Arabs, without a syllable of protest from the U.N. Since 1967, of course, those same armistice lines have been treated by the enemies of Israel as sacrosanct, the lines that Israel “violated” by having the bad taste to win the war that had been thrust upon it.

Kerry doesn’t mention this second example (the first being the Jewish Agency’s original acceptance of the Partition Plan) of Israel’s willingness to give up its rights to the “West Bank,” by making the armistice lines into permanent borders, only to have the Arabs reject that offer. For if he did, that would paint a different picture, of an Israel that time and again has been willing to give up territory that it either held, or had a strong legal claim to, for a promise of peace. And when, in June 1967, three Arab states – Egypt, Syria, and Jordan – tried and failed to destroy Israel, the result of the Israeli victory was that it came into possession, in a war of self-defense, of the Sinai, East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, and the territory known as the “West Bank.” And Israel, as soon as the hostilities ended, “waited for a phone call” from the Arabs, assuming they would want to negotiate a peace treaty. Israel made clear that it would not return to the armistice lines of 1948-49, and would not allow Jerusalem to again be divided. Other than that, everything was negotiable. But the phone call never came.

Encouraging and good news from Europe
===============================.

First from the Czech republic, they want to ease the gun laws. 7-9 million citizens, 800,000 registered firearms currently, and they want more. And they want to put that change into their constitution as an amendment !!! Explanation according to one of their ministers: If people can carry pistols ready to fire, events like Nice and Berlin can be stopped immediately. Hey, we Euros do have brains! Well, at least some of us.

Jesus! We may get sanity back into Europe. The Merkel regime wants to tighten German gun laws, doesn’t look to good though, even the left is getting cold feet and says it’s not a good idea. Here in the UK, we had to surrender our pistols & revolvers, handguns generally, in ’95 – I’m still p…d off!

Here’s something funny from Vienna: The greens (same anarchists and ultra lefts as everywhere else) had a demo for the dead in Aleppo, together with the ‘Austrian’ Turks. Thereafter they complaint to them about
A) that the women were corralled into a separate section, including the Austrian lefty women. And
B) about the ocean of Turkish flags, asking what these have to do with the victims in Aleppo. The leader of the Turks replied that he thinks it’s upsetting (!?) that the greens show so little understanding, respect and tolerance towards another, friendly culture….. Heheheheheh!

Two bits from Germany: The Merkel press, that means all the so called conservative papers, plus several TV and radio outlets, are surprised and ‘disturbed’ by the public reaction. Reaction to what? The Merkel media and some regime members complained that there was too much police, and that the police was to heavy handed in dealing with masses of invaders, about 5-6,000, banding together in various German cities, or approaching these. On a number of occasions the cops stopped the trains miles before the main stations and forced them to disembark. And plenty of arrests, including men on wanted lists. Still there were riots and some sexual attacks. The latter doesn’t seem to bother the Merkel media, nor her regime, but the police’s way of handling the thugs. And now they are upset because the German public approves of the cop’s actions whilst condemning the media. Do the Germans wake up?

Silver lining on the horizon? Gets better, or just as good, at the last PEGIDA meeting the speaker warned explicitly the Muslims of, essentially, war. And threatened to take it ‘this time’ to their holy places. THAT’s NOT ALL: For the first time too PEGIDA provided English subtitling so that the English speaking world (translate, the Arabs) also understand what is being said. And now get this: Just two weeks ago the speaker would have been arrested on the spot – nothing happened, under the gaze of the police! Well, as I wrote and explained, civil war or massive frequent unrest, in Europe, central and western, the only question is: 2017 before the elections, or 2018 after the elections. Link to the PEGIDA speech, less than a minute: youtu.be/1tylBvxqG8o —-(you have to put in the “”http – : //”” yourselves since recently my posts with links are no longer published.)—-

And now something depressing from Holland: It appears that in Zwolle, capital of the Province Overijssel, for several years by now, Dutch schoolchildren are being bussed to mosques for Islamic prayer and Allahu Akbar calling. Link: youtu.be/XLasVTMa5CI

it is *also* a microcosm of , for example, the relationship between *India* and *its* Mohammedan neighbours and fifth columnists.

And the ‘relationship’ between Thailand and *its* Muslim fifth columnists.

And the ‘relationship’ between the Philippines…

ETC.

*Every* majority Infidel nation – and that includes a LOT of countries in east/ west/ and subsaharan/ equatorial Africa, these days – that has either a large Muslim fifth column – whether this has gotten in by ‘migration’ either legal or illegal, or whether it has been ‘acquired’, so to speak, when said infidel state, in defending itself against jihad incursion by a neighbouring mohammedan entity, wins territory that, unfortunatley, comes with mohammedan residents in situ – and/ or Mohammedan neighbours, is in exactly the same boat as Israel.

Namely: appeasement doesn’t work. (Muslims do NOT ‘do’ reciprocity with Infidels; never have, never will). And… the opposing party, that is, the Mohammedan entity, whether it is inside your gates or outside, or both, intends nothing less, in the long run (and ‘long run’ can mean centuries) than your utter destruction. Because you are Infidel, and Infidels are not supposed to live except on tenuous sufferance by lordly Muslims who regard themselves (Muslims) as entitled to exclusive and total ownership of and control over every inch of ground on the planet. As Joseph Schacht put it, in ‘An Introduction to Islamic Law’ – ‘the basis of the Islamic attitude towards unbelievers is the law of war. They must be converted, or subjugated, or killed”.

The Obama Administration has throughout its tenue “misinterpreted” the situation in the Mideast to a degree that nobody believes that Obama himself was unbiased towards the Jewish State of Israel. Obama has always been in bad faith in his policy. Bad judgment won’t suffice. He’s acting like an errand boy for anti-Jewish sentiments throughout the Muslim world.

I was an 11 year-old boy when the Six-Day War took place. My father and I listened intently to U.N. debates in the run-up to that war broadcast on radio, and I was quite struck by the belligerence and evident bad-faith of the Arabs and their Soviet-bloc patrons. I was very keen as a boy and as a young man to read, listen, and watch the news of the day, and momentous news it has surely been–the endless war of attrition, Black September and plane hijackings, Munich Olympics massacre, Lod Airport slaughter, the Yom Kippur War, the rescue Raid on Entebbe, and . . . and. . . .

About that UN resolution 2334 that Obama backs, or at least failed to veto, which calls for the dividing of the State of Israel in to a “two state solution.” Which in reality is not a real or genuine at all . Thus John Kerry a fool. For even of idea of some people of dividing Jerusalem as well as other parts of the State of Israel between the Jewish people of the Muslim/ Arabs is nothing but folly. To engage the madness of such “talks” is a hoax and a farce .This is because in the so called “negotiations” between the heads of the Jewish nation of Israel and the leaders of the “Palestinians” the Muslim /Arabs the “Palestinian” leaders will speak the truth only when in happens to fit their agenda. The rest of the time the will be speaking half-truths and outright lies. For their goal is to obtain all of the land of the State of Israel ,.Even in it takes much time and it means getting the land piece by piece. So those “peace talks” are a hoax. For the “Palestinian” leaders are employing what is the Islamic doctrine of Taqiyya . Which is the Islamic dogma that lying and deception are good things to do as long as it’s done for the cause of the advancement of Islam. The insidious scheme is part of the stealth jihad .Otherwise known as “Islamic Gradualism.” This sly and something subtle strategy of disingenuous speech, lying deception of achieving the goal of all the land of Israel a war ploy that will be a disaster if the heads of the State of Israel are foolish enough to agree to divide the land of Israel with Muslim /Arabs ,the “Palestinians.” For if such a “peace dialogue” results in a divided land, the outcome will literally be murder. For “Palestinian” leader will allow the jihadists use that land as a base to launch murderous rocked attacks in to Israel. As for example, Hamas of Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Such false hopes for peace which are based on the foundation of lies are nothing new when it comes to Israel . For example, the Bible in Psalm 55:20, 21. Reads “Such men do violence to those at peace with them and break their promised word; their speech is smoother the butter but their thoughts are of war.” [N.E.B.]

This UN Resolution 2334 the Obama and Kerry support counting this folly two things need to be made known. First .John Kerry had tried the make the resolution sound like a valid and good “plan for peace.” This so called plain peace is, in reality, a scheme for disaster is really based on false premises. For its foundation that will produce only a bogus “peace” that will not last. Kerry says no more settlers should be allowed to move into that area land of he calls “the occupied West Bank.” Kerry actually means Jewish settlers and Kerry and he is such an ignorant man that he calls the Muslim/Arabs of that land the “Palestinians” The term “Palestinian” originally was used for all people , Arab or Jew, who, lived in that specific area of land the Middle East before the establishment of the State of Israel and for quite a number of year thereafter . Only later did they Muslim /Arabs apply that term only to themselves feeling that by giving themselves that title them some kind of genuine claim on the land. For balance and fairness there are some Christian/ Arabs who also give themselves that title of “Palestinian.”
Second, there is a good chance the Obama had his sinister hand this the drafting of the UN Resolution with the Muslim/ Arabs. If not Obama, at least, could have had vetoed that farce of a UN resolution. So ether way he was wrong. Obama along with Kerry also see the West Bank as “An occupied area of land which the Jewish people have no right to .” For Obama and Kerry to have such a view exposes that they are extremely ignorant or they do know better but couldn’t care less. For concerning this subject, things become even more absurd and outlandish when Obama had said that he is “a Christian.” Obama is some strange kind of “Christian” when he also said that the West Bank is “an occupied land the Israel had no right a genuine claim to” For a real Christian respects the Bible which give the Jewish people the genuine right to all of that land including the West Bank as the gift of God. As seen in the Bible in Genesis 28:13-15. 35:10-12. Deuteronomy 32:48,49. Psalm 105:7-11. So a true Christian, not Obama, would acknowledge that God had given that land to the Jews as iby Divine Decree . Likewise a real Christian, not Obama, would recognize that the Bible also teaches that the Jewish people should have that land by historic rights. As shown in the Bible in First Kings 4;20,21,24,25. 8:55,56. In addition a genuine Christian ,,not Obama, would take wise words of the teaching of Jesus. For Jesus taught “If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.” Mark 3:24. [N.K.J.V.] Moreover , the Bible in Informs its reader in Psalm 135:4. “For the Lord had chosen Jacob for Himself. Israel for His special treasure.”

About that anti-Israel UN resolution that Obama may well have had a sinister hand in creating, or at least failed to veto, which calls for the dividing of the State of Israel in to a “two state solution.”
This shows some things about President Obama .That he is very to do a much hard as possible in the short time he has before he leaves Office. Even if he doesn’t really have such malicious anti- Israel, pro–Islamic feeling the same about of damage is nevertheless done. This also exposes the falseness on his claim that he is “a Christian.” For a real Christian would take seriously the teaching of Jesus. By Obama backing the UN resolution Obama Obviously doesn’t care what Jesus taught . For Jesus taught “If a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.” Mark 3:24. {K.J.V.]
In addition , to risk sounding really far –out it had been reported that Obama’s national security advisor , James Jones, had declared the President Obama in the year 2009 had religious experience in the White House Office in the Obama believed that God appeared to him in a vision and told him the he should work for the dividing of the land of Israel into “two states.” [1] if this report of a supernatural experience of Obama actually occurred then the Bible contains the answer to this story . For the Bible teaches that Satan is so very deceitful that he can “appear as an angle of Light” Second Corinthians 11:14 . Furthermore, to divide is showing that Obama ,who is for sure not the Anti-Christ is Nevertheless influenced by the spirit of the coming Anti-Christ who is predicted, in the Bible ,to come in the future. So to divide the land that composes Israel according to the Bible is wrong . So wrong ,in fact , when the real arch – villain who is will be the Anti Christs comes to power in the Middle East he “shall divide the land” Daniel 11:39. As for Obama is the reported religious vision he had in which supernatural being told him to “divide the land ” that this instruction is in contradiction to the Bible in Daniel 11 39. It’s thus in the light of Isaiah 8:20. An instruction in error, folly and darkness. Shame on Obama for wanting to “divide the land” and likewise being taken in by a deceptive religious experience.

An excellent precis. It’s too bad the League and Britain called the Mandate by the last name the Romans gave to it. Had there not been a Jewish rebellion from 65 AD to 165 AD, the Mandate would have been called the Mandate for Judea and Samaria. Imagine the Arabs pretending to be Judeans!

But this doesn’t address the war the Left has on colonialism/imperialism. This is undoubtedly the source of Kerry-Obama hostility. Mr. Fitzgerald lets himself in for criticism from that quarter by not acknowledging the Israeli-French-British effort to regain its Suez Canal. In my opinion, they built it and the nationalization/expropriation set back Egypt in diplomatic and economic terms for a century. It may never recover. But Leftists think like Arabs. What you offer an Arab as part of negotiation is his whether he agrees to the deal or not. It’s the way they think. It’s not quid pro quo but a balance of gifts and gifts can’t be offered to infidels. Kerry-Obama will never see this through anything but a Marxist filter, nor will Jimmy Carter.

Meanwhile back at the gas chambers, the Germans, as obsessed with their guilt over The Holocaust (and rightly so) as the Americans are over slavery (similarly) are overreacting by committing suicide. “Let The Right One In” is now considered a masterpiece of film in Europe and not because it was any good. It’s the story of a poor vampire, born that way, who is helped and understood by a kind girl who makes a deal with him. The only person who commits a moral act in the whole movie is a middle-aged woman who, recognizing the nature of her infection, throws open the drapes the commit suicide via the sunlight. Sound familiar?

As I understand it, Nudnik, there were two Jewish rebellions against the Romans, and I think you conflate the two. The first was 66 A.D. to 72 A.D., which resulted in the destruction (70 A.D.) of the Second Temple and leveling of Jerusalem, and the second, led by Simon Bar-Kokhba, from 132 A.D. to 135 A.D.

Your point is well taken, though–too bad that we call the whole land “Palestine,” after the Phillistines, and not “Judea,” after the Jews.

Hugh is right, I think, to gloss over the Anglo-French partnership with Israel in in Sinai Campaign, since Anthony Eden and company had different objectives than the Israelis, who were provoked by Egypt and intervened defensively. It was the exception, not the rule, that British and Israeli interests ran parallel in 1956.

Sorry to double-post–I never quite get the hang of posting. I just recalled that the last Jewish resistance to the Romans in the First Jewish Revolt ended in 73 A.D., when the defenders of Masada chose mass suicide over enslavement.

The first Jewish Revolt in AD 68 – 70 was led by the King of Edessa (in northern Syria). (The Edessan monarchy were prozelite Jews, and paid for the gold menorah in the Temple. The Edessan Queen Helena became the Queen of Judaea in AD 47.). )

But the Romans deleted Edessa from the history books, so nobody knows anything about them.

Hugh is right, I think, to gloss over the Anglo-French partnership with Israel in in Sinai Campaign, since Anthony Eden and company had different objectives than the Israelis, who were provoked by Egypt and intervened defensively. It was the exception, not the rule, that British and Israeli interests ran parallel in 1956.

Thank you, Mr. Fitzgerald, for bringing up the historical truths upon which the Jewish State gained her land. Why people are obsessed with going back to 1948/1967? How about 1915, 1917, 1922 to look at what was actually agreed upon in the British Mandate or the San Remo Agreement? Resolution 242 and also the limitations within the charter of the UN. Its very clear that the same mandate that established the borders for Iraq, SA and late comer TransJordan established the Jewish State. The UN has never questioned the legality of those borders and the mandate doesn’t address Arabs. Rather, some of the letters recently published make it very clear that King Abdullah was very clear that the Jewish State was separate.
Here is an article containing the letter: http://maurice-ostroff.tripod.com/id350.html.
The words “International Law” are also bandied about but never is it explained what is meant by the term regarding what is binding and what is not.
This piece should be required reading for everyone, particularly Kerry and Obama.
Again thank you.

America’s biggest fear in this situation is that war between Israel and ANY Arab nations might result in Russia taking a side. I hope that President Trump will continue to support Israel and that the US will enjoy a relationship with Russia that will make interference from Moscow unlikely. It is obvious that Putin is on the right side of the Syrian conflict. Obama has been on the wrong side of everything for 8 years. The only entity on the planet that can harm the US is the United Nations and our cooperation with its’ One World agenda. I hope to see Israel secure and the US supporting that security as we always did before Obama!

Kerry’s views are hardly original; they sound like boilerplate 1968, when the Soviets were a major force in the region and the KGB came up with the Palestinian narrative to make Israel sound like a Goliath. He doesn’t mention Islamic ideology because that would diminish the Palestinian cause by implying that they have free will and are not merely victims. Of course, there has been much water under the bridge since then, but John Kerry has been content to sit on the bank and make sand castles. So many people stop thinking as they age.

Kerry may be the dumbest Secretary of State of all time. There are other competitors, for instance Madeleine Albright (Halfbright?) and, of course, the most corrupt major party Presidential candidate in American history who was formerly Secretary of State and bone-headedly didn’t know that a private e-mail server was a very bad idea or even what “C” on the documents she received meant. Reasonable minds can differ here on this.

Interesting, informative, and for a long history, very concise. kerry doesn’t want to acknowledge the truth of any of Israel’s history that puts islam in a bad light or shows how moslims don’t really want peace.

The fact that they turn down all viable options, even ones that favor them, and then when they can’t get more by being obstructive, want to claim and demand that they accepted the conditions because those conditions were better than what is currently offered shows how evil and greedy they truly are.

Ancient Israel did not offer land for peace to those who worshipped satan through other names (like molech, baal, etc). The same satan of those days is behind islam of today. That evil demon does not want peace with God’s people.

God’s people may wish peace and work for it. The devil wants war and his children slave and kill to make it happen.

The Arabised Christians – who eked out a wretched existence as dhimmis, *just like their Jewish dhimmi neightours*, under viciously-cruel and capricious mohammedan overlords, for 1400 years, ever since the Muslims invaded and occupied Christian-and-Jewish-and-Samaritan-populated eretz Israel which in the 6th century was governed by Byzantium – are free and safe in the modern Jewish state of Israel. Far, far, FAR more so than in *any* majority-Mohammedan state *anywhere* in the world.

And luckily some of them are shucking off their dhimmi eagerness to carry water for the Jihad against the Jews – waged by the mohammedan mob – and recognising when and where they are well off.

In terms of absolute *numbers* the Christian population within Israel proper has *increased* since 1948. The Christian population of places like Bethlehem, which are not direclty governed by Israel, has diminished NOT because of the joooooz but because of continual oppression and violence – land-grabs, threats, kidnappings of women, etc – waged by the MUSLIMS. As for Gaza, which is totally controlled by the damn mohammedans… I think there are about 1000 Christians left, and their situation is miserable not because of the Jews or Israel but because the Muslims there are reimposing a de facto dhimmitude situation; forcing the Christians back down into the sort of condition – humiliation, degradation, and constant physical peril – that they (and all other subjugated infidel populations – see, for example, the Copts of Egypt) endured under Muslim imperial occupation for centuries.

I’d much rather be a minority in the Jewish state of israel than a non-Muslim minority in *any* Mohammedan country.

Father Gabriel Naddaf, by the way, doesn’t agree with you about the Joooooz. He’s smart. He’s figured out that life is pretty good as a Christian minority in Israel and that the only thing that keeps it that way is the ring of steel provided by the IDF, that keeps the mohammedan mob OUT and at bay. So he’s been encouraging Christian Arabs/ or perhaps one shoudl say ‘Arabised Christians’, because a good few of them are redisovering their ancestral non-Arab Aramaean identity and language – to *join the IDF* and *help keep Israel safe from the genocidal Jihad*.

mr hugh fitzgerald, you are a scholar of lies and deceptions.was treaty of partition dividing the land between jews and palestinians as two states in 1948 not a multilateral treaty?can the invasion by jews abrogate that multilateral treaty creating the two states of israel and palestine?note un resolution no.242 passed pursuant to un charter requires israeal to push back to the borders resulted from the partition treaty creating the two states.did israel comply?if israel is demanding secured and defensible borders pursuant to the same un resolution no.242 why then jewish civilian settlements on palestinian land?can jewish civilian settlers guarantee secured and defensible borders? in what way?if it could,are the settlements permanent or temporary pending the time israel feel secured from outside agression?if it is permanent settlement,then resolution no. 242 is defeated.hence, resolution no. 2334 becomes neccessary to safeguard resolution no.242 which requires israel to push back to pre-1967 borders. so, mr fitzgerald you can see the fallacy in your arguement in an attempt to debunk mr kerry’s point of view.

Israel has been remarkably generous in its demonstrated willingness to “take risks for peace,” though Obama and Kerry hardly seem to have noticed.

This is so true. By dealing in good faith, the Jews became taken for fools. Has it occured to anybody that after several decades of failed peace talk that maybe it’s not the talkers, but the side that calls for destruction of the other side? That’s within the realm of possibility… until you turn on the TV or pick up a major newspaper.

It’s funny how everyone in the USA is promoting Israel as a saint country. They are NOT! They are the devils who are starting all these wars in the Middle East. Have we forgotten that we have Christian Palestinians that are caught in the crosshairs? Who speaks for them? Israel main goal is to wipe Christianity off the face of the earth, why are we allowing them? All you have to do is read their Talmud to understand their hatred towards Jesus Christ and Christians. Enough! Let all Americans request peace and be fair to all people in that region. We give billions of dollars in aid and weapons to Israel each year, yet our own citizens and veterans are hurting. NO MORE FOR ISRAEL!

I don’t think Israel started every war in the Middle East. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are certainly responsible for starting the most recent. And, pray tell, how did Israel start the present conflagration in Syria?

I do not believe it is the responsibility of the US to protect any religion, including Christian, but to protect US citizens of any faith.

What absolute bullsh*t. Christians in the “Palestinian territories” are not being targeted by Israel, but by *Muslims*. The truth is that Christians are under threat throughout the Muslim world–the only place they are safe in the Middle East is in Israel.

glenn, it is good that you confessed that israel is an agrressor.but many filthy christians close their eyes to this realiy and have decided to sumit to evil jews’s whims and caprices as if it is an article of christian faith.donald trump is now leading this school of obedient slavery to evil jews. but at the end you have misconceived the issue that the solution is to defeat political islam.islam and socio-political and socio-economic life cannot be divorced unless you are saying islam shall be abolished altogether.in islam you cannot believe and practice one aspect and leave the other aspect unlike your filthy christianity which conced that god was defeated or is dead.may be it is this concession you call reforms.we need not make fundamental reform to islam by changing the sources like quran and hadith.that will be blasphemous.but you can reform the models built in the light of the quran and hadith by updating the models to suit changing circumstances.muslims thinkers have been doing this for quite a long time.if you care you can consult volumes of works produced by modern muslim scholars in this regard.

Religions determine the advancement of civilization. Most, if not all betterment of humanity has occurred under the mantle of Christianity. By betterment I mean advancement in art, literature, music, all forms of academic opportunity, inventions, plentiful energy, good stewardship of the land, plenty of affordable food and travel infrastructure. This is just to name a few which are sorely lacking in every area once overrun by Ottomans and converted by the sword to Islam. Nobody wants to move there and everybody wants to move out.

glenn (sic), it is good that you confessed that israel (sic) is an agrressor.but (sic) many filthy christians (sic) close their eyes to this realiy (sic) and have decided to sumit (sic) to evil jews’s (sic) whims and caprices as if it is an article of christian (sic) faith.
………………………………………….

Has muhammed forgotten that he has actually asserted that “sumitting” to Jews *is* an article of the Christian faith? Previously, he has ludicrously claimed that this is in the Bible.

As I have noted previously, muhammed has no concept of equality–if Christians are not oppressing and enslaving Jewish people, they must instead be their slaves. *This* is the Muslim mindset.

But we consider Jews and Gentiles to be equals, and support Israel because she is a civilized nation threatened by surrounding Muslim countries.

Why doesn’t muhammed just admit that like every other pious Muslim he seeks her destruction?

More:

donald (sic) trump (sic) is now leading this school of obedient slavery to evil jews (sic).
………………………………………….

Again, since Donald Trump does not want to enable Israel’s destruction, he must be their “slave”. Do Muslims ever actually listen to themselves?

More:

but (sic) at the end you have misconceived the issue that the solution is to defeat political islam.islam (sic) and socio-political and socio-economic life cannot be divorced unless you are saying islam (sic) shall be abolished altogether.
………………………………………….

Well, muhammed is being honest here, for once. Conquering and oppression is a key part of Islam, and Muslims believe they are being prevented from fully practicing their vicious creed if they are not able to persecute and slaughter Jews.

Yet more:

in islam (sic) you cannot believe and practice one aspect and leave the other aspect unlike your filthy christianity (sic) which conced (sic) that god was defeated or is dead.
………………………………………….

Of course, this is absolute bullsh*t–but is *very telling*. Muslims believe that people must be weak if they are not savagely attacking and murdering other people. And this is the very point of “Allahu Akbar!”–i.e., my God is “greater” than yours–that is, that your God is weak or dead and my God is a mass-murderer whom you should fear.

And this shows that Muslims understand nothing about Christianity–but it certainly does expose Islam.

And more:

may (sic) be it is this concession you call reforms.we need not make fundamental reform to islam (sic) by changing the sources like quran (sic) and hadith.that (sic) will be blasphemous.but (sic) you can reform the models built in the light of the quran (sic) and hadith (sic) by updating the models to suit changing circumstances.muslims (sic) thinkers have been doing this for quite a long time.if (sic) you care you can consult volumes of works produced by modern muslim (sic) scholars in this regard.
………………………………………….

And what would this mean, in the practical sense? Are Muslims going to stop oppressing and butchering Jews and Christians and other Infidels? No; that would be “blasphemous”.

Most likely it just means they are willing to fudge that Islamic ban on Bi’da (innovation) to enable them to use IEDs and suicide vests and cell phones as bomb triggers.

Kerry, Obama and Clinton enjoy starting wars. They want this as their legacy. The UN are worthless and should no longer get US funds. Great article. Too much to absorb quickly. Very scholarly article. Looking forward to Part 2.

If whatever the ”palestinians” and the crooks are saying is right, back in 1917 —when Allenby liberated jERUSALEM–he should have encounter a government called Palestine and its capital.
He didn’t find either.
..

I can understand the HATE THAT OBAMA HAS FOR THE JEWS/ISRAEL. “THE MAN IS A FUCKEN MUSLIM AND THAT IS ALL TO IT” BUT AS FOR JOHN KERRY, THERE IS NO DOUBT THE KERRY’S WIFE IS PULLING EVERY BID OF STRINGS THAT’S ATTACHED TO JOHN KERRY’S BRAIN AS WELL AS HIS MOUTH “TONGUE”.THE THING IS THIS, BARACK OBAMA, JOE BIDEN, JOHN KERRY AND THE MUSLIMS IN THE DEMOCRATS ADMINISTRATION HAVE ALL ALLOWED THE JEWS/ISRAEL TO LIVE INSIDE THEIR FEEBLE HEADS THAT HAVE INFILTRATED THEIR BRAINS AND CAUSES THE HATE. THEREFORE IT IS THEIR OWN FUCKEN FAULT. I SAY THAT THE 3 AFOREMENTIONED AND THEIR ADMINISTRATION’S CORRUPTED BRAINS WILL CORRUPT THE POOR MAGOTS THAT WILL FEAST ON THEIR CORRUPTED FLESH SIX FEET UNDER BUT THE JEWS WILL CONTINUE TO LIVED IN THEIR HISTORICAL ANCESTORS LAND FOR ANOTHER 4000 YEARS AND WILL CONTINUE TO FOR AS LONG AS GOD WILL ALLOW THIS CORRUPT WORLD TO GO ON. MAY GOD BLESS ISRAEL/JEWS. MAY GOD BLESS BENJAMIN NETANYAHU AND HIS GOVERNMENT, BLESS HIS FAMILY TOO..

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Robert Spencer’s Free Speech Book

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.